lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Sep]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Regression in 2.6.27 caused by commit bfc0f59
On Mon, 1 Sep 2008, Larry Finger wrote:
> Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Mon, 1 Sep 2008, Larry Finger wrote:
> > > The timed sleep is as accurate as I can measure.
> > >
> > > I put in some test prints. The value of pm2 is zero when the else branch
> > > of
> > > the "if (hpet)" is entered; however, pm1 is 15768471. When we reach the
> > > do_div(tsc2, tsc1) statement, tsc2 is zero, which I think means that the
> > > two
> > > calls to tsc_read_refs() are returning the same junk value.
> >
> > Ok, so the pmtimer is probably detected later as unusable and disabled.
> > Please check your logs for: "PM-Timer had inconsistent results:"
>
> Booting 2.6.26, the dmesg output has a line that says:
>
> PM-Timer running at invalid rate: 200% of normal - aborting.
>
> Amazing that it should be exactly 200%. Why is the CPU running at half speed
> when the PM-Timer rate is measured?

The kernel assumes that the PM timer frequency is normal, so it does:

read pm-timer start value, read TSC start value
wait for a some time
read pm-timer end value, read TSC end value

And the TSC frequency is calculated via:

TSC-End - TSC-Start
TSC-Frequency = -------------------- * PM-Frequency
PM-End - PM-Start

So if your PM-Timer runs at the double frequency for reasons only
known to the Chip Manufacturer the kernel miscalculates the TSC
frequency by factor 0.5.

Simple rule of three.

Thanks,

tglx


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-09-01 22:47    [W:0.342 / U:0.328 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site